Tarne Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 MAD is still well and truly fine. North Korea can't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 For now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 ...repulse a large scale invasion decisively. "We" do have the advantage of being an island nation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Kim jong un is on our side stop panicking. Just an excuse to build forces against china. He plays the part well, hollywood is a great inspiration to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Next up is a missile shield to protect us from our evil kim, that will just happen to cover us from china too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 And by us i mean the us of america Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 ...repulse a large scale invasion decisively. "We" do have the advantage of being an island nation... That was looking a bit wobbly in 1940. However, we also have the advantage of a stonking great bomb with "vapourisation of your capital" written on the side. Concentrates the mind. I remember that idiot Kinnock telling the Soviets that when in power he would scrap the UK deterrent if they would scrap an equivalent number of theirs. He thought he'd got a good deal. He didn't understand deterrence either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 That was looking a bit wobbly in 1940. However, we also have the advantage of a stonking great bomb with "vapourisation of your capital" written on the side. Concentrates the mind. I remember that idiot Kinnock telling the Soviets that when in power he would scrap the UK deterrent if they would scrap an equivalent number of theirs. He thought he'd got a good deal. He didn't understand deterrence either. Quite. It would have put the planks on the Eastern border at increased risk. You would hope Labour would have learned from the "Kinnochio Effect" but apparently not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwell Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 I'm not blase. I advocate vigilance and keeping deterrence. To get rid would be blase. Seems a bit straw-man given that nobody serious is proposing unilateral nuclear disarmament. No, but by not supporting the Trident programme the proposal would be for nuclear disarmament for the UK. We can't be having that. Long live Trident and the Vanguard class Sub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 No, but by not supporting the Trident programme the proposal would be for nuclear disarmament for the UK. We can't be having that. Long live Trident and the Vanguard class Sub. Nobody serious is opposing Trident in principle. The questions raised by those MPs with a special interest in the forces have related to the political background. Your "long live" thing is silly. Find a less important issue to troll. A serious adult doesn't talk like that. It shows a casual lack of respect for the close-knit family of serious people who actually go to sea for months at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 https://wikileaks.org/trident-safety/ A read of this may give a little more perspective Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.